Allowed

Bank of India v. M/S Agma Foundations Private Limited

DRT20 May 2026TA/922/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal allowed an application by Bank of India for recovery of dues from M/s Agma Foundations. The court found the bank proved its claim via affidavit and documentary evidence, noting the defendant failed to appear or contest the matter after being set ex-parte.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs.32,75,489.63 plus further interest @ 11% p.a., costs, and issuance of a Recovery Certificate.

Bank of India versus M/S Agma Foundations Private… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2026)

¶1

T.A. No. 922 of 2023

¶2

20.05.2026

¶3

¶4

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHENNAI

¶5

Dated this the 20^th day of May, 2026

¶6

Present: SMT. S.V. GOWRAMMA Presiding Officer

¶7

TRANSFERRED APPLICATION No.922 of 2023

¶8

(Originally filed before DRT- II, Chennai as OA No.93 of 2020 and thereafter transferred to this Tribunal and renumbered as TA No.922 of 2023)

¶9

Bank of India, Kodambakkam branch, No.25, Second Cross Street, Trustpuram, Kodambakkam, Chennai- 600 024 Represented by its Constituted Attorney

¶10

…Applicant

¶11

-Vs-

¶12

M/s Agma Foundations Private Limited, No.13/34, First Cross Street, Trustpuram, Kodambakkam, Chennai- 600 024 Represented by its Directors, i) Ms. Sathyanarayanan Nirmala ii) Mr. Umashankar Subramanian ….Defendant

¶13

Counsels on record / appeared:

¶14

Counsel for Applicant : M/s S.R.Sudhanraj, S.Saradha Defendant was set ex-parte on 18.05.2022

¶15

: - FINAL ORDER- :

¶16

This Original Application is filed on 02.11.2019 by the applicant bank

¶17

under Section 19 of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 (formerly Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993) against the defendant, for recovery of a total sum of Rs.32,75,489.63p (Rupees Thirty Two Lakhs Seventy Five

¶18

Thousand Four Hundred and Eighty Nine and Sixty Three Paise

¶19

Uploaded on 20.05.2026 at 17:30 hours

¶20

T.A. No. 922 of 2023

¶21

¶22

20.05.2026

¶23

only) due in respect of Cash Credit facility (A/c No. 801430110000068) repayable together with further interest @ 11% p.a. with monthly rests from the date of Application till the date of realization in full and for costs of this OA.

¶24

Originally, this Application was filed before DRT-II, Chennai, assigned OA No.93 of 2020, and thereafter in pursuance to the notification from Ministry of Finance, DFS dated 04.10.2022, OA No.93 of 2020 stood transferred to this Tribunal and renumbered as TA No.922 of 2023.

¶25

Brief Facts of the case:

¶26

The Applicant submits that the application is filed within the period of limitation as prescribed under Section 24 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993, and the subject recovery claim falls within the jurisdiction of this Tribunal.

¶27

It is the case of the applicant bank that the defendant company represented by its Directors approached the applicant bank for Cash Credit facility for sum of Rs.1,05,00,000/-. After carefully considering the request of the defendant and upon verification, the applicant sanctioned Cash Credit facility of Rs.1,05,00,000/- to the defendant in the year 2012.

¶28

It is submitted by the applicant bank that the defendant on 03.01.2017 had requested the applicant bank to reduce the Cash Credit limit availed by them amounting to Rs.1,05,00,000/- to Rs.30,00,000/and the defendant had further requested the applicant to release the collateral security given by the Guarantors, Mr. Navalan Krishnamoorthi

¶29

Uploaded on 20.05.2026 at 17:30 hours

¶30

T.A. No. 922 of 2023

¶31

¶32

20.05.2026

¶33

and Mr. Raju, Requisition Letter dated 03.01.2017 submitted by defendant to the applicant.

¶34

It is submitted by the applicant bank that after carefully considering the request of the defendant and the representation made by them, the applicant bank on request of the defendant reduced Cash Credit Limit to Rs.30,00,000/- from the old Cash Credit Limit of Rs.1,05,00,000/-.

¶35

The applicant bank submits that to secure the due repayment of the aforesaid Cash Credit facility, the defendant company represented by its Directors executed loan security documents at the Kodambakkam Branch of the applicant bank for Cash Credit limit of Rs.30,00,000/- on 10.02.2017:

¶36

a) Demand Promissory Note dated 10.02.2017

¶37

b) Bearer Letter dated 10.02.2017

¶38

c) Deed of Continuing Security cum Declaration dated 10.02.2017

¶39

d) Hypothecation cum Loan Agreement dated 10.02.2017

¶40

e) MCLR Agreement dated 10.02.2017

¶41

The defendant availed loan for its business activities and generated income from its business. The defendant did not repay the loan as under taken and committed default. Despite several demands made by the applicant the defendant failed and neglected to repay the loan.

¶42

Since the defendants did not regularize the loan the accounts of the defendant were classified as Non-performing Asset. The loan account of the defendant was classified as Non-Performing Asset (NPA) by the

¶43

Uploaded on 20.05.2026 at 17:30 hours

¶44

T.A. No. 922 of 2023

¶45

20.05.2026

¶46

¶47

applicant on 30.04.2019 as per the guidelines issued by the Reserve bank of India.

¶48

The applicant further submits that as on date of the filing of this original application a sum of Rs.31,39,137.39p towards the principal outstanding. On 04.05.2019 the defendant had paid a sum of Rs.20,000/and on 29.05.2019 the defendant has paid a sum of Rs.20,000/-. The amount paid by the defendant has been given due credit in defendant’s loan account. Rs.1,74,352.24p is the uncharged interest is payable by the defendant to the applicant for the period from 30.04.2019 to 29.10.2019 at 11% p.a. compounded with monthly rest in respect of the cash credit facility in all totaling a sum of Rs.32,75,489.63p is due and payable by the defendant to the applicant in respect of the Cash Credit facility.

¶49

It is further submitted by the applicant bank that since the account of the defendant had been classified as Non-Performing Asset by the applicant interest for the period from 30.04.2019 to 29.10.2019 has not been debited to the accounts respective credits after date of NPA have been given due credits in uncharged interest calculation. However, this will not absolve the defendant of their liability to pay interest for the said period. Despite repeated request and demands, as defendants did not come forward to repay the dues, the present Original Application (OA) has been filed by the applicant bank for recovery of its dues from the defendants.

¶50

After the filing of the OA, summons was sent to the sole Defendant through Registered Post with Acknowledgment Due, which was returned

¶51

Uploaded on 20.05.2026 at 17:30 hours

¶52

T.A. No. 922 of 2023

¶53

20.05.2026

¶54

¶55

with remarks “Left”. Applicant Bank had caused paper publication of the notice and filed proof thereof. When OA was taken up on 18.05.2022 even after giving sufficient time, there was no appearance or representation from the defendant. Hence, sole Defendant was placed ex-parte on 18.05.2022.

¶56

Heard the submissions of Applicant Bank and perused the

¶57

records.

¶58

To prove the case of the Applicant Bank, Sh. Jayaraj, Constituted Attorney of the Applicant Bank, has filed his Affidavit by way of evidence and same was considered as evidence of AW-1 and list of documents came to be marked as Ex A-1 to A-8.

¶59

A careful examination of the pleadings in the Proof Affidavit and documents Exhibits A-1 to A-8 evidence that the borrowal of credit facilities and execution of loan and security documents are true, in terms of averments made in Original Application as well as Proof Affidavit filed by applicant bank establishing its claim. Applicant bank filed Statement of Accounts duly certified under Bankers’ Book Evidence Act, evidencing the amount claimed against defendant.

¶60

The defendants were set ex-parte on 18.05.2022, but till this day they did not take any action to set aside the ex-parte order and did not choose to contest the claim. Further, a careful scrutiny of records makes it clear that present application is filed well within limitation and this Tribunal possesses necessary and proper jurisdiction to entertain and adjudicate the claim. No oral or documentary evidence on the side of

¶61

Uploaded on 20.05.2026 at 17:30 hours

¶62

T.A. No. 922 of 2023

¶63

20.05.2026

¶64

¶65

defendants are produced or filed to dispute the claim of applicant bank. Hence, it can be concluded that applicant bank has proved its claim against defendant.

¶66

With regard to the amount advanced, the interest applied, the conduct and operations in the account and the default committed, this Tribunal comes to the conclusion that the applicant bank is entitled for a final order on the following terms:

¶67

: O R D E R :

¶68

17. The OA is allowed with costs,

¶69

(a) The applicant bank is allowed to recover from the Defendant, a total sum of Rs.32,75,489.63p (Rupees Thirty Two Lakhs

¶70

Seventy Five Thousand Four Hundred and Eighty Nine and Sixty Three Paise only) due in respect of Cash credit facility (A/c No. 801430110000068) repayable together with further interest @ 11% p.a. with monthly rests from the date of Application till the date of realization in full along with costs of this application.

¶71

(b) The applicant bank shall file the latest memo of calculation of

¶72

OA amount together with interest, costs etc., to be paid by the Defendant duly considering the amounts, if any, paid by the Defendant and/or amount realized by sale of assets etc., during the intervening period after the filing of the OA, enabling the Registry to prepare Recovery Certificate for the amount to be paid by Defendant to the applicant bank.

¶73

¶74

Uploaded on 20.05.2026 at 17:30 hours

¶75

T.A. No. 922 of 2023

¶76

20.05.2026

¶77

¶78

from the date of receipt of this final order.

¶79

(d) Recovery Certificate shall be drawn up and issued to the

¶80

Recovery Officer in terms of the final order.

¶81

A copy of this order be communicated to the parties concerned.

¶82

Sd/(S.V. GOWRAMMA) PRESIDING OFFICER, DRT-III, CHENNAI

¶83

(Dictated to PS, transcribed by her, corrected, signed and pronounced by me on this the 20^th day of May, 2026)

¶84

ANNEXURES

¶85

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK :

¶86

AW-1: Sh. Jayaraj, Constituted Attorney of the Applicant Bank

¶87

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶88

Sl. No.	Date	Description of Documents	Exhibit No.
1.	03.01.2017	Requisition letter submitted by defendant to the applicant.	A-1
2.	24.01.2017	Letter bearing Ref No.KDM/ADV/CC-68 issued bythe applicant to defendant.	A-2
3.	10.02.2017	Demandpromissorynote.	A-3
4.	10.02.2017	Bearer letter.	A-4
5.	10.02.2017	Deed of continuing security cum declaration.	A-5
6.	10.02.2017	Hypothecation cum loan agreement.	A-6
7.	10.02.2017	MCLR agreement.	A-7
8.	10.02.2017	Statement of account.	A-8

¶89

Uploaded on 20.05.2026 at 17:30 hours

¶90

T.A. No. 922 of 2023

¶91

¶92

20.05.2026

¶93

Witness Examined for the Defendants: -Nil-

¶94

List of Documents Exhibited for the Defendants: -Nil –

¶95

:-SCHEDULE-:

¶96

-NIL-

¶97

Sd/(S.V. GOWRAMMA) PRESIDING OFFICER, DRT-III, CHENNAI

¶98

Uploaded on 20.05.2026 at 17:30 hours

Bank of India v. M/S Agma Foundations Private Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bank of India v. M/S Agma Foundations Private Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mr Samsudeen N versus Canara Bank

S Sadagopan versus Bank of Baroda

Mr M Barkathhulla Son of Mamuth Khan versus State Bank of India

Mr P Babu versus India Resurgence Arc Pvt. Ltd.

Indian Overseas Bank versus Ms Crown Spacifics And Interior Decorators India Pvt. Rep By Directors And Five Others

Bank of Maharashtra versus M/S Reflection Investment